Jump to content

Talk:Aghstafa (river)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Talk:Aghstev River)

Gragg

[edit]

Gragg, this is not a place to continue edit wars from the Russian wiki. You know the result of discussions there. Grandmaster 10:53, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Name

[edit]
Discussion on the Russian Wiki can not be a base to remove a page in the English Wiki[1]. As the source of the river is in Armenia, I think it should be moved back to Aghstev, as other rivers, which flow through Armenia and the Azerbaijan or an other coutry.--Vacio (talk) 15:09, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It is difficult to find which form is more used since Aghstafa has other meanings as well an is the name of an Azeri rayon. However the form Aghstev is prefered by a.o.:
According to WP:NC we should use the most common name in English.--Vacio (talk) 15:32, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

NationMaster is a wikipedia mirror.

Google search:

Agstafa - 49,500 hits

Aghstafa - 1,360 hits

Aghstev - 1,010 hits

Agstev - 529 hits

Both Agstafa and Aghstafa get more hits than Aghstev or Agstev. Thus, the present title should remain. Grandmaster 16:21, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The hits, according to you, Agstafa get can not be valid because:
  • as earlier said in the most cases it refers to the Agstafa city or district, not the river
  • you searched in az.google, however the name must be common in English, not in Azeri
  • you searched Agstafa with a small letter (agstafa)[2].
If you search in google.com, with advanced search on the English language:
Aghstafa in the most cases refers to the eponymous Azeri district and city and therefore if you explicitly search for the Aghstafa river you get only 54 hits. The name Aghstev river is thus more common in English than Aghstafa. Moreover, Aghstev is also used in UN publications [3][4]. I think these facts, together with the argument that the river originates and flows first through Armenia then through Azerbaijan, are enough to move the article back to the original title version.--Vacio (talk) 06:00, 24 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Aghstafa still gets more hits than Aghstev: Aghstev - 792 hits And the name is not always used together with the word river. And the fact that there's a city in Azerbaijan named after the river is another strong argument in support of the present name. The city is not named after Aghstev, it is named after Aghstafa. No city in Armenia is named after the river. Plus, in Russia and Soviet Union the river has historically been Aghstafa (Akstafa), see Brockhaus and Efron Encyclopedic Dictionary: [5], Great Soviet Encyclopedia: Акстафа (река на Кавказе), modern Russian Encyclopedic Dictionary [6]. Grandmaster 06:19, 24 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And it was historically called Akstafa by western sources too, see 1896 source:

The valley of the Akstafa river, until one has passed Delijan, presents to the traveller a series of scenes of the utmost beauty.



Walter Burton Harris. From Batum to Baghdad. Adamant Media Corporation, 2000. ISBN 1402197829, 9781402197826

Grandmaster 06:38, 24 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sure other western travellers from the 19th c. or ealier called it also Agstev or otherwise, when they visited the region (your source says nothing that Akstafa is the historical name). The point is what is the contemporary common name in English. Thus Brockhaus, GSE and other Russian sources can not be used as starting point for English language articles. Also the fact that there is a city in Azerbaijan with the name Aghstafa, is absulutely not an argument to use the present title. It explains why you get more hits if you search for Aghstafa without specifieing that you search for the river. --Vacio (talk) 07:39, 24 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
And how do you know that the common name is Aghstev? Sources that report from Armenia call it Agstev, and sources that report from Azerbaijan call it Aghstafa. Note that Britannica also says that Aghstev is a river in Armenia, but says nothing about Azerbaijan, where the longer part of the river runs, which means that it refers only to the Armenian part of it. There's no common English name for this river. But in the former USSR/Russia region, to which both countries belonged for centuries, the river has always been called Aghstafa or Akstafa. Grandmaster 10:46, 24 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - Something to consider: in Google books, we have the following results:
Agstev river - 53
Aghstev river - 20
Aghstafa river - 2 (one of which does not refer to the river, but to the city
Agstafa river - 7 (only one of which appears to be about the river)

In Google Scholar, we get the following:

Aghstev river - 9 (of which 2 appear to refer to the river)
Agstev river - 9 (most of which appear to be about the river)
Agstafa river - 16 (only one appears to be about the river)
Aghstafa river 9 (only 1 or 2 appear to be about the river)

Based on this fairly quick Google sampling, it seems that either Agstev or Aghstev are favored in scholarly books, while they are pretty evenly split in scholarly journals (i.e, only a couple of appearances for each spelling variation). Based on the Google Book results, it seems that Agstev is the preferred spelling in English. Parsecboy (talk) 05:26, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It is preferred spelling, when Armenia is described, but the books and articles about Azerbaijan use the name of Aghstafa. The river has different names in different countries, but there does not seem to be a generally accepted English version of the name, that is used to refer to the river along its entire length. I have never seen a book or a serious international source that would call Azerbaijani section of the river Aghstev, and the city of Aghstafa cannot be located on the river of Aghstev. There are no towns called after this river in Armenia, that's why the spelling of Aghstafa is better. Grandmaster 07:19, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Check the first result in the Google Book search for Agstev. It's a UN publication that refers to both Armenia and Azerbaijan, and uses Agstev river. Parsecboy (talk) 12:53, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The most popular in google books is Russianized spelling Akstafa river, which gets 254 hits: [7] It is the most popular spelling since the region was a part of the Russian empire and USSR. Akstafa river also gets 36 hits on google scholar: [8] Grandmaster 13:18, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Although by putting it in quotes (to remove the possibility of there being returns with just "Akstafa" or "river"), you get 55 results for Akstafa. It seems that of the three, Aghstafa is the least preferred. Parsecboy (talk) 13:23, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Well, Akstafa is corrupted Aghstafa, so it is still the most popular spelling in scholarly literature. We can go with Akstafa, if that solves the problem. If we put Agstev river in quotes, it will get only 33 hits, which is less than 55 hits of Akstafa river, so the latter is more common. Grandmaster 13:29, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I would be fine with Akstafa, it is used by reputable organizations like the US's National Geographic Society. Parsecboy (talk) 13:48, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Me too, if no one objects. Grandmaster 05:31, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
One minor issue is that the letters "gh" in "Aghstafa" spelling more neatly deliver the Azeri sound "ğ". --Brandспойт 13:45, 11 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
True. So let's decide, Aghstafa or Akstafa. Grandmaster 05:25, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I personally sway to Aghstafa, as it is, but one may choose Akstafa for there are less clashing consonants. --Brandспойт 22:37, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

(od) Aghstafa seems to be the least preferred in English language sources. Akstafa seems preferable to me. Parsecboy (talk) 23:17, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't mind either Aghstafa or Akstafa. The latter is preferable, if we go for the most common name in English language sources. Grandmaster 05:20, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
"Akstafa" is the Russian name of the river (and not a "Russianized spelling"), and I don't agree that because "Akstafa river" and "Aghstafa river" together get more hits in books.google than Aghsev alone, the latter must be left out. In google.com "Akstafa river" gets only 25 hits [9], much lesser than "Aghstev" which gets 239 hits [10]. The fact that in books.google "Aghstev river" gets lesser hits than "Akstafa river" is because you get there generally academical stuff often based on Russian sources (some of these hits are from SSSR geographical documents). I think google.com shows clearly that "Aghstev river" is the most common name in English language sources. It is used by at least 2 UN publications ([11][12]) and also according to books.google ([13]) the from Agstev is used by:
  • American Meteorological Society
  • American Geological Institute
  • American Water Works Association
  • American Geographical Society of New York
I therefore request that the title of the article should be moved back to "Aghstev river" before further discussion, because it was moved by Parishan without any discussion and I think it was not justified.
Also, I think we should discuss the issue in a wider context. There are many rivers which first flow trough Armenia and later Azerbaijan. I hope we will not go each time the same way as here. We should discuss a general policy on naming such geographical names. --Vacio (talk) 10:34, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
According to the rules, google search is not a mandatory reason for rename of the articles. Google search returns mostly Armenian sources or sources reporting from Armenia. Akstafa is more popular with specialist sources, as it was demonstrated. Agstafa is also used by authoritative sources, and Akstafa used even more than any other name. So we should stick to either the present title, or Akstafa, as it is the most popular name in the specialist sources. Grandmaster 11:06, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
And according to which rule the article was renamed from "Aghstev river" to Aghstafa river" by Parishan[14]?! And it absolutely untrue that google gets mostly Armenian sources or sources reporting from Armenia. Look above how many non-Armenian organisations use the Agstev. The WP rules require that the most common name in English must be preferable, which in this case is manifsetly Aghstev. --Vacio (talk) 11:25, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It is impossible to establish a common English name by a simple google search. Google books shows that the specialist sources prefer Akstafa. Grandmaster 11:58, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
That's just because the English can't pronounce "gh" correctly! Given that the river is of minor international importance and notability, we can't use Google to decide on how it should be spelt. Nor can we directly use the Armenian or Azeri alphabets for the title. The name needs to be as close as possible to the actual pronounciation. For either version, "gh" seems closer than "k". As for which version to use, there should be Wikipedia guidelines. The problem must have come up before, and not just in relation to Armenia/Azerbaijan cross-border rivers. How much of the river is in Armenia, how much is in Azerbaijan? Is it more important in one country than in the other? Is it usual to refer to rivers that are tributaries of larger rivers by their source name, or by the name in use at the locations where they join the larger rivers? Meowy 16:26, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I believe the importance of Azeri spelling of Aghstafa or the Russian Akstafa is based on the fact that there's a town in Azerbaijan, named after the river. The town of Aghstafa is the center of the district by the same name. It would look strange if we write that the town of Aghstafa is located on the river Aghstev, after which it is named. At the same time, no town in Armenia is named after this river. Grandmaster 05:35, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That argument makes no sense whatsoever. There is a town in Armenia called Yeraskh, so according to you a can go and just move Aras River to Yeraskh River without even adding a letter to the talk page!? It is also a false argumantation of you as if the longest part of the river flows trough Azerbaijan. The part of the river which flows through Armenian is twice longer than the part of it in Azerbaijan (see this map)! --Vacio (talk) 07:46, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Aras is different. It is a large river, known in English sources for centuries. Akstafa is a small river, and it forms only one town, the center of a district. Grandmaster 08:03, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe we have to look at it at a different angle. Articles have titles so that the articles can be found. What would someone searching for information about the river call the river, bearing in mind that they are searching the English-language Wikipedia? So maybe Akstafa is the best choice. (Yep - I know I was saying it wasn't in the last post I made!) Meowy 21:03, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I don'tmind, let it be Russianized Akstafa, after all, it is the name accepted in scholarly sources. Grandmaster 06:03, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Meowy, for what reason the article would bear the title Akstafa, when it is almost 10x lesser common in google then Aghstev? Also why would a river which flows through Armenia'and for a little part in Azerbaijan, have an Russian name? Please also note that I have been asking for reasonable arguments in support for the troublesome move of the article by Parishan (who so far has not typed a single word in this talkpage). What concerns me here is the policy of some Azeri users, the first move an Armenian name then try to justify it with false argumantations: (hits in google.az, representing the Russian name of the river as a "corrupt spelling", asserting that the part of the river which flows through Azerbaijan is longer than which flows through Armenia, etc). --Vacio (talk) 07:38, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Google search is not a mandatory reason for rename. As I said, Akstafa is the name used in scholarly literature, and there are cities named after the river in Azerbaijan. Grandmaster 11:47, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I believe what you're implying here is that the "scholarly literature" you are referring you, which remains to be named, is most likely mentioning Agstafa as reference to the Azeri town rather than the river, which is a moot point. Aghstev is the name with which the river is referred to in the majority of its length, which the naming of the article should follow. Chaojoker (talk) 00:21, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Aghstafa_(river)&oldid=1204589881"